Legal Opinion

Smith v. Keator

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 1, 1974No. 82PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOORE, Justice.

The only question before us on this appeal is the constitutionality of the ordinance in question. Plaintiffs contend that the ordinance is invalid because it violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the United States Constitution.

Plaintiffs first assert that the ordinance violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by permitting the city council to act arbitrarily in denying or revoking massage parlor licenses. Plaintiffs have not applied for a license, so the question of a denial or revocation has not been before the city council. Instead,…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Dunn v. BlumsteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Reed v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Frontiero v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. F. S. Royster Guano Co. v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  5. Cox v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1941

32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. James O. Pollard, Etc. v. Lila Cockrell, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
  2. State v. TolleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  3. Matter of BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  4. River Birch Associates v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
  5. State v. BrightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980

48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API